Subject SMML08/09/99VOL662 Date: Thu, 09 Sep 1999 00:22:03 +1000 shipmodels@tac.com.au -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS INDEX 1: Re: Current Kit Projects and Domestic Opposition 2: Re: Good, Bad & the Ugly 3: Re: Pre-war German turret markings etc. 4: Re: Good, Bad, and Ugly 5: HMS Cornwall 6: X-MAS boats 7: Bay and River 8: Re: Naval Ordinance Websites 9: Anchors aweigh 10: Re: White metal and adhesives 11: Naval Guns 12: The good, the bad and the ugly 13: Re: Members-only access. 14: Airfix Mauretania 1999 model sighted in Stuttgart 15: Lee Aurora kit and colours 16: Ugliest Ship 17: Polish DDs of WWII, Heller campaign, SMML comments, Caoline and WEM contest 18: Re: HMS CORNWALL 19: Re: Coast Guard manaul 20: R/N bases 21: US Coast Gaurdsman's Manual 22: Re: HM Ships Cornwall & Berwick -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD INDEX 1: Pearl Harbor Dio Update - September -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MODELLERS -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Katz, Gene S" Subject: Re: Current Kit Projects and Domestic Opposition HowdyY'all/G'Day Mates: I wonder if I am in manifest danger of crossing over from kitbuilder to kitcollector? I have a 1/500 Nagato in an early stage on the weighs, and four other IJNs piled up on the desk awaiting opening. I have lost count of the boxes which are packed in larger boxes, and the larger boxes in stowage in the attic. If we had a basement, it would be full also, so maybe we are lucky to have a slab on grade townhouse. The domestic opposition I am encountering is reaching heavy flak proportions (no sense of humor there). Conservatively estimated by me at plus or minus 120 kits (ships, cars, A/C) and perhaps 25 or so Burago 1/18 and 1/24 cars. I have definitely run out of maneuvering space, yet male pride won't allow me to admit the wife has a point. Anybody out there interested in acquiring a Burago car model such as a 1/18 Alfa Romeo 2300 Spyder (1932ish) or a 1/24 Ferrari F40 or Testarossa? I have duplicates and do need to start thinning out; one of the problems inherent with buying special deals and closeouts is that you forget what you already have unless it is staring you in the face. A lot of my "stuff" has been taken by my domestic opposition to be given to me on the birthday, Hanukah, Christmas, Epiphany (we hit 'em all, folks!), and I forget which car models I have. Finally, what do you do when you have limited display space and a seemingly unlimited supply of displays????? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2) From: "Les Case" Subject: Re: Good, Bad & the Ugly Nicest: RMS Mauretania (1907) Ugliest: any modern cruise ship Les Case -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3) From: "Fernando, Yohan" Subject: Re: Pre-war German turret markings etc. Bob, I think turret markings you are referring to were used as recognition markings for neutral countries' ships in Spanish waters during the Spanish Civil War (by neutral countries, I mean those neutral in the civil war, not WWII). There are a couple of photos of British ships with similar turret markings for the same reason during this time. I believe the colors of the stripes were just black and white. I built the 1/700 Kobo-Hiryu Koln kit so here is a quick rundown- the kit is pretty basic as most of this manufacturer's kits are. All resin. The hull and major superstructure parts are pretty good but detail is sparce in some areas. The smaller pieces are crudely cast and are very hard to identify on the sprues. They require alot of cleanup and in some examples are more easily replaced by Skywave parts or scratchbuilding. Major omissions inlucude all the AA guns (the 10.5 cm guns and mounts not being the easiest things to scratchbuild...) and the barrels for the 6" guns (I used modified 6" barrels from a Skywave US Equipment kit). That being said, the kit, with some extra work, came out quite nice for me. But it is nowhere near an out-of-the-box build. If you can get the Samek kit, you will probably be better off. Samek makes some very nice kits, which are cleanly cast and include some photo-etch. The instructions are also worlds ahead of what came with the Kobo Hiryu kit. Pricewise they are about the same. I havn't seen the Nurnberg kit, but if it is anything like their other kits, then it would offer alot more value than the Kobo Hiryu kits. Hope this helps a bit! Yohan Fernando -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4) From: "Fernando, Yohan" Subject: Re: Good, Bad, and Ugly A couple of nominations: Best Looking Ships: 1) Atlanta class CLs (nothing comes close to these guys) 2) Rebuilt Tennessee and California (alot like the S. Dakotas, but even more compact and bristling with barrels) 3) Yamato class (huge yet graceful- alot of talent in those Japanese naval architects) Ugliest Ships: 1) Soviet Gangut class (way ahead on the ugly scale than anything else!) 21) Graf Zeppelin (all the better she was never completed...) 22) Any cage-masted US battleship before the Big Five (the 2 cagemasts of equal height really don't do anything for me) ...no that's not a typo. The first 20 positions for the ugliest ship really could be filled up by that category winner! As for the rebuilt QEs, I think they are among the best looking RN ships- while not graceful, they are rather powerful and aggressive looking. Guess it all comes down to personal opinion. I'm waiting for the masses of ugly votes for IJN Fusa and Yamashiro, which personally I think are great looking ships... That was fun! Yohan Fernando -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: HMS Cornwall Hi WRPRESS I doubt Cornwall was actually camouflaged at all. Turns of Fate (by Ken Dimbleby) includes a photo of her in overall AP507C in late April 1941 and she was certainly in that colour scheme up until May 26th of that year, when she returned to South Africa for action repairs. After that the next photo I have is in 1942 and once again its overall AP507C. Dimbleby himself doesn't mention any repaint during this period though he does go into detail about the damage in the action against the Pinguin. This would suggest that any colour scheme was temporary at best and lasted only a few months. I don't have any information on Berwick before 1941 unfortunately. Chris Langtree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6) From: "chenyangzhang" Subject: X-MAS boats Hi PC X-MAS attacked both Gibralter and Malta. The Gibralter attack took place on 18 September 1942 with human torpedoes and resulted in the sinking of the the tankers Fiona Shell, Denbydale and the freighter Durham. The Malta attack was on the night of 25-26 July with various types of explosive motor boats and human torpedoes but was a complete failure. All the attacking motor boats were either sunk or hunted down the next day and the human torpedoes were unable to penetrate the boom. I remember the film about the sinking of the Valiant and Queen Elizabeth as well and from what I recall it was devoted entirely to that subject and had nothing to do with Buster Crabb etc (still can't remember the name though). One scene that sticks in the mind is the Italian officers being placed in the bowls of one of the battleships (ie nearer the explosive charges) to help them become a bit more co-operative. Chris Langtree My vote for most handsome ship - Renown after rebuilding (Iowa yukk). The ugliest would have been the Faa' di Bruno, an Italian moblie battery. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7) From: "FCR" Subject: Bay and River Hello SMMLiers Does anyone know of models of ships of the Bay and River class frigates from RN, in WWII. My country, Portugal, have a few units from these classes and I would like o make it for the Portuguese Navy. Thanks for any answers Filipe Ramires Portugal -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8) From: "Jeffry J. Fontaine" Subject: Re: Naval Ordinance Websites >> Trying to locate websites that have comparative information about W.W.II naval guns of the major combatants. Nothing elaborate just general info ( range, penetration, rate of fire, etc.) from 3" up to 12" guns. << Hello Rick, and SMML; I invite your attention to the following URL: http://www.flash.net/~hfwright/index.htm which is the webpage for the BB-56 USS WASHINGTON. There are a number of links from there to other pages which will provide you with similar information. On the USS WASHINGTON page you will find information on the 16', 5', 40mm, & 20mm weapons. How is that for a start. Regards, Jeffry Fontaine From the Kitsap Peninsula which is thankfully more than a stone's throw from Seattle. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9) From: Brian Selzler Subject: Anchors aweigh Hello all, About a week ago there was a question regarding the names and uses of anchors. As far as I can tell, the names originate from the days of sail and generally indicate their function or location. Hence, the bowers were found at the bow with the best bower on the starboard side and the small bower on the larboard. The sheet anchor would be behind the best bower and the spare anchor behind the small bower. Sometimes the bowers were the largest ones, othertimes all four were the same size so they could replace each other if lost. The sheet anchor was so named because it was secured with the sheet cable and it and the spare were ususually rigged so they could be quickly released if the bowers failed to hold. Other anchors carried were the stream and kedge anchors which were about 1/4 and 1/8 of the weight of the bowers. The stream anchor being used from the stern to prevent it from swaying, as in a tide change. The kedge being light enough to be carried by a ships boat some distance and dropped to allow the warping the ship in that direction, as in winching off a sandbank for example. Stockless anchors were an innovation that allowed the elimination of the stock from the upper end of the shank to allow it to be winched right up into the hawsepipe for storage instead of being lashed to catheads. There are lots of different designs of stockless anchors so, I won't even try to name them but, I think their common feature is that the flukes pivot on the lower end of the shank to various degrees. I hope this helps a little, Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10) From: Bruce Burden Subject: Re: White metal and adhesives >> I know that white glue (Elmer's) can be used to attach photoetch to injection molded surfaces. Can white glue be used to attach photoetch parts to resin? << Yes. >> Also can white glue be used to attach white metal to both resin and injection molded surfaces? << I expect so. Although the weight of the white metal might make it difficult to hold the position as the glue sets up. The only problem with using white glue is that it won't take any strain, so use it only for non-stress bearing parts. Another possibility is to use clean acrylic (gloss coat, Future Floor Wax/Johnson's Kleer/etc.) or lacquer/enamel based clear coats. The acrylics have the advantage of drying quickly and quite flat (especially Future). If you have a white metal/PE part that will bear a load, you will need a better adhesive, such as epoxy. "Superglue" is good under tension, but has poor shear strength. Bruce -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11) From: Mike Connelley Subject: Naval Guns Howdy: A good site with lots of info on naval ordnannce is http://www.warships1.com/index_weapons.htm Just plain http://www.warships1.com is pretty neat all by itself and deserves a good look. Cheers Mike -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12) From: "Jens H. Brandal" Subject: The good, the bad and the ugly >> I noticed today on Hyperscale there's a string going about the nicest and uglies plane of all time. So that got me to thinking of what we think the nicest and ugliest ships of all time are. Since most of us concentrate on WW2 and before, lets keep the nominations there. << Ahem, pardon me, but why should a universal nomination of the most handsome ship be limited to your own narrow field of interest? You're actually going to include everything from the first man made, hollowed out log of 10000 B.C. or so to the USS Wisconsin in 1945, and then exclude the last 55 years? To quote Spock; "that's not logical" (I do not count myself as a Trekkie, but I once celebrated my birthday by watching five Star Trek movies in one go). Could we go on to assume that the majority of list subscribers are located in the US, and should we then assume that only US ships are sufficiently interesting to be nominated on a "world wide top ten"? I think not. I do not make any apologies for thinking that modern equipment is fascinating both from an engineering and aesthetics point of view, and I think it is unnatural to create divisions like the ones you are proposing. If the focus was on WW2 ships or WW1 to WW", that would be a different cup of tea, but it was not. Anyway, my nomination for the best looking ship is the NS Savannah. The graceful, balanced design and futuristic shape makes it no.1 in my book, but I do agree with your description of the the Yamato. It has definite aesthetic features that sets if apart from other battleships. As to the most ugly, I am told there are Norwegian coastal defence ships of pre-WW2 era that would win hands down. I do not have any visual image of these, so it is unfair to comment. The one ship class I can comment on though must be the Royal Navy K-class submarines of WW1. Just the idea of a steam powered submarine sounds too "incredible" to be true, but I guess it was the available technology at the time. The Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates is also a candidate - there's something about the ratio of length to heigh that is mysteriously wrong. Next? Jens -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13) From: "Jeffry J. Fontaine" Subject: Re: Members-only access. Here is my six bits worth of opinion concerning the exclusion of visitors to the display and vending areas at IPMS events. I believe it is morally and financially wrong to exclude anyone that is not a member of IPMS from access to the vending area just so the IPMS members can get a chance to go shopping before the non-members are allowed in. Is being first to the vending table that important? Are you that worried that someone else might get that kit you wanted? The bottom line is "get the cash," this applies to the event organizers as well as those that are working a vendor table. If the event is to break even, it needs to get the public involved in the event. And speaking from experience as a vendor behind the table, the color of the money is the same whether it came from the IPMS member or the casual visitor. This is a public event, and as such the public should be allowed access to it. What we seem to be forgetting is that the mission of every IPMS member at any IPMS event is: 1. Have a good time while you are there. 2. Recruit new members to the hobby and the Society. 3. Buy lots of kits and accessories. 4. Break even after all the bills for the event are settled. To Recruit new members, you should afford them the ability to access every "opportunity" that you have as a member. Excluding non members from the vending and display areas by posting a sign that says "IPMS members only," will certainly convey the wrong message and drive away potentional new members. To perpetuate this hobby and the IPMS, we need to introduce the fun of building models to a new generation of model builders before we are all wearing bi-focals and "depends." Sincerely, Jeffry Fontaine IPMS-USA # 32709 "from Bremerton, Washington, which is thankfully NOT a suburb of Seattle." Hi gang, I agree with the above sentiments, especially if you replace the word "IPMS" with "any modelling club". I would however add to the above list: 5) Persuade SWMBO, that you really do need all these purchases. Shane -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14) From: "Jürgen F. Mayer" Subject: Airfix Mauretania 1999 model sighted in Stuttgart There was a question about the Airfix reissue of the Mauretania some weeks ago, whether it had appeared anywhere so far, and I didn't see any positive response so far. I was in a toy shop in Backnang in the Stuttgart area in Germany today, and I found a brand new Mauretania Airfix 1/600 kit, price labelled Sept. 2, 1999. They also three of the small kits (around 1/600) of sailing ships (Golden Hind, Victory, and Mayflower) as well as about six of the larger Airfix sailing ship kits. Of course, I bought the Mauretania (and might get some of the other kits in the next days). The parts came out in in grey, and the quality of the kit seems to be good on first sight. The decals with the ship's name in yellow seem slightly too large, a flag sheet with flags too large is also included. The box shows the Mauretania passing the Statue of Liberty. Except for the colour of the plastic, the kit seems to be right like the one I built more than 30 years ago (and do not have any more). Still, the lifeboats do not have coverings. Any hints or collaborations for an authentic building of the Mauretania kit are welcome! Jurgen Hi Jurgen, One book that may be of help is Robert Ballard's book: "Exploring the Lusitania". Apart from being a good read, it has the benefit of giving you ideas for conversions, etc ;-)). It also has some nice shots of both ships. Also try the following articles, courtesy of my shiplist(at the APMA site): RMS Lusitania Entex 1/350 Scale Models International Oct 1979 pp 652 Pt 1 Scale Models international Nov 1979 pp 724 Pt 2 Scale Models International Dec 1979 pp 802 Pt 3 Scale Models International Jan 1980 pp 19 Pt 4 RMS Lusitania Revell 1/350 ex Entex Model Ship builder ?? ?? Pt 1 Model Ship Builder March 1991 pp 45 Pt 2 RMS Mauretania Plastic Ship Modeller 97/4 1997 pp 21 article Shane APMA site: http://www.tac.com.au/~sljenkins/apma.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15) From: Stuart Robottom Subject: Lee Aurora kit and colours Hi all. To the person who enquired about the 1:300 Lee Aurora/Penelope kit. I had a look at my friend's yesterday and can say that his example was cleanly moulded, no visible flash at all. The (full, one piece) hull does not have a proper bow knuckle on it. The stern appears to be a bit full, and differs from the plans I built my Penelope to. For $31 it appears to be good value, considering that, locally, a 1:700 Exeter is $35. Does anyone know the colours the Aurora was wearing during Force K ops? I was unable to answer, the only photo I have shows her with dark hull, light superstructure... Regards, Stuart Robottom http://www.deakin.edu.au/~robottom/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16) From: Stephen C Gustafson Subject: Ugliest Ship My vote for the ugliest ship would have to go to AR-1 USS Medusa (1924-1950). Ugly! But I would kill to have one in my 1:1200 collection. Are you listening Paul Jacobs? I am open to other possibilities, however. Our British friends have been known to build some extremely ugly auxiliaries. Best to all, Steve -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17) From: "Peter Mispelkamp" Subject: Polish DDs of WWII, Heller campaign, SMML comments, Caoline and WEM contest Please excuse the length of this message, but I have finally found some time to add my two cents and respond to some threads that I have been following in recent weeks. First, Thanks to Art Nicholson for your answer regarding the Mirage Polish DDs. Now can anyone tell me which kits actually represent the ships as they appeared during the war? I am guessing that the Wz + number designation signifies the year. So If I am right, I should choose the Grom Wz. 40 kit, and the Wz 44 kit of her sister? BTW I am curious about the 4" twins carried by the latter. Were they similar to the mounts carried on the later RN large light cruisers? If yes, this kit could come in really handy for my plans to back-date two UPC Tigers into the Swiftsure and Ontario. Heller email plan: Just tell me - do we have a useful address yet? The last few messages seem to point to people who just happen to work there - not key members of their sales/marketing staff. Personally, while I am still missing some kits to complete my fleet ( collection?) I would love to see Heller release some new kits - or perhaps update their KGV to a mid-late war Duke of York, Anson or Howe standard. SMML: Regrettably, an overload of work forced me to sit on the sidelines during the Lee/Jenkins battle. I do feel that Shane and "Mistress" Lorna have done a very good job of running this forum but am saddened that when the mist cleared we lost a knowledgeable and experienced shipmodeler. Unfortunately, I joined the list too late to form an educated opinion on the way that Greg ran the list, but I have come to appreciate Shane's (and his side-kick's) steady hands. If he (they?) can keep that delicate balance needed to bring and keep professional writers, amateur historians and ship modelers on the list then I will be very happy indeed. As a freelance writer, I can not begin to explain the sensation that hits you when you have the chance to exchange observations with writers whose work you have admired for many years. I hope that they stay on. BTW - Shane what gives with that recurring war injury of yours? Just a quick note - I don't know about the rest of you, but I was glad that I was nowhere near HMS Caroline's sights when she unleased her broadside! Guess the Vanguard was not the last BB to sail in British waters after all. Speaking of WEM, what do the rest think of her questions? One was easy, I knew the answer to three with a certain degree of certainty - but one question has me stumped. How are guys doing? Sorry for the long post. Peter M -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18) From: "Russell M Smith" Subject: Re: HMS CORNWALL There is a picture on the web site British Cruiser Actions of the Cornwall sinking. It is very dark but I don't see any camo. The same picture is in a crewmembers book called "Turns of Fate: The Drama of The HMS CORNWALL" by Ken Dimblely along with many other pictures none of which shows any camo. But it stands to reason that she should have been by then. I made mine without it till I could get something definate to work with. Russ Smith -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19) From: "Bill & Kaja Michaels" Subject: Re: Coast Guard manaul >> On another note, the Blue Jacket's Manual has been used by naval recruits for most if not all of this century. Does anyone know what the coast guard uses? << That would be the "Coast Guardsmans' Manual". Bill Check out my US Coast Guard subjects model list at: http://www.tiac.net/users/billkaja/kitlist.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20) From: WRPRESSINC@aol.com Subject: R/N bases Can anyone give me a complete list of Royal Navy Bases circa 1903 - 1913. I have three already, they are Chatham, Portsmouth and Devonport. A port such as Dover was not classed as a base, nor was Sheerness I believe. Rosyth may have been classed as a base in the above time frame, but I cannot be certain. The reason for this question has to do with the various shades of grey employed in the pre world war one period. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21) From: Duane Fowler Subject: US Coast Gaurdsman's Manual Hello, The US Coast Guard used the Blue Jackets manual before WWII but starting in 1952 published its on manual called, appropriately enough, the US Coast Gaurdsman's Manual. I have all eight editions from them until now. Best regards, Duane Fowler -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22) From: Sanartjam@aol.com Subject: Re: HM Ships Cornwall & Berwick Hi SMML, Regarding camouflage patterns for the Cornwall and Berwick: Ken Dimbleby's book on the Cornwall, Turns of Fate, has several wartime photographs of the Cornwall, one supposedly taken shortly before she sank the Pinguin on 8 May 1942 and another supposedly in 1942; neither shows a camouflage pattern that I can discern (which may not mean much). As for the Berwick, there is a photograph of her in the latest (Autumn 1999) issue of Warship World showing her in a two-tone pattern on her upperworks. The photograph is undated, but she still has her aircraft hangar, which would make it prior to the 1942 refit in which the hangar was removed. Art Nicholson -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TRADERS, ANNOUNCEMENTS & NOTICEBOARD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) From: "Jeff Herne" Subject: Pearl Harbor Dio Update - September Hi guys, It's been awhile, granted, but the summer is almost over and I'm getting back into the groove. As most of you know, I was hospitalized for a few days, a result of severe dehydration and exhaustion. Needless to say, I was ordered to lie low and reduce any and all undue stress, which explains why the lawn hasn't been mowed and the wife has moved out (not really, everything is fine). For those of you who have been concerned, the project is still well underway, in fact, I'm nearing completion of 2 cruisers, the New Orleans and the Sante Fe. I know that John Cobb is almost done with Enterprise, and the Tom Dougherty and the Sub Committee crew are working hard on the Gatos and Balaos, they will be receiving a new brass set for the subs in the next few days. If anyone has any questions, concerns, updates, modeling needs, (within reason here guys) let me know. I still have alot of brass frets to divvy up and Tom's Modelworks has again offered to help us out with this project. I would also like to propose a PHD meeting scheduled to coincide with the SMML Convention aboard the USS Salem. Having taken a serious look at the project as a whole, I am of the opinion that we should get the vessels completed in Phase 1, the buildings and related structures in Phase 2, then get everything placed and groundwork done in Phase 3. The exception to this rule (I think) will be the sub base and structures, Tom & his crew can develop the plan the way they like, since they're focusing on a specific area. Comments? I had set a deadline for this project, but I think it should be lifted; we all have too many irons in the fire with our real lives, and something as simple as a single vessel can hold up an entire portion of the project. So, it will be done when it's done, I hope that you'll stick with us to see it completed. I am also hoping to have an East Coast work session to help layout the base and get things rolling with Phase 2, we'll discuss this at the SMML Convention. Regards, Jeff Herne CINCPHD -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- End of Volume